Re: [alf-dev] Workspace discussion

[Mark Phippard <markp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

alf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote on 06/07/2006 11:18:28 AM:

> In the case of SCM, where and how many services are running would 
> ultimately be based on the capability of the SCM tool.  If the tool 
> requires physical access to the disk to manage a workspace, you would 
need 
> to run the service on whatever physical systems you wanted to touch with 

> an ALF service flow.  If the tool has its own "agents" already in place 
> that allow it to update systems "indirectly" then you would likely only 
> need one service.

Richard,

Re-reading both of our posts a few times, I actually think that our 
architectures are very similar.  I think the only difference is that you 
envision the SCM server adding functionality that, at least in the case of 
Subversion, I intend to push back to the service flows and the 
implementation.  In other words, someone using my tool, in their service 
flow, will invoke my service on the system where they need the code to go. 
 Someone using your tool, when building a service flow, might direct them 
all to a single server.  From an ALF standpoint there is no difference. To 
support your needs, it does mean that the workspace "object" will need to 
contain information like host name and path, where as my implementation 
would "discard" the host name and just use the path.  Or maybe the BPEL 
engine would use the host name to know where to invoke my service.  In 
either case, I still think this is all the same architecture with just 
differences in how it is deployed.

To everyone in the SCM Vocabulary Group:

I would STONGLY encourage you to re-read the ALF Archtecture document:

http://www.eclipse.org/alf/includes/ALFArchitectureDraft-v00-07.pdf

If you are at all like me, you probably read this weeks/months ago when 
you were first learning ALF and a lot of this did not make sense.  There 
is a lot in that document that clarifies things we have been talking 
about.  I just re-read it today and it made a lot more sense to me and 
helped frame our discussions.  I think it would also do a good job in 
reminding us what exactly a "Vocabulary" is and what we are doing.  I 
think we are getting off-track and talking about things that are not 
needed to define a vocabulary.

In the same vein, I had also forgotten that there is a very nicely done 
document with use-cases:

http://www.eclipse.org/alf/includes/ALFALMUseCases.pdf

And there is also a Requirements document:

http://www.eclipse.org/alf/includes/ALFRequirements.pdf

The requirements document is more about the event manager code and those 
aspects of ALF, but still has some relevance.

Thanks

Mark




_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. and SoftLanding Europe Plc by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs. 
_____________________________________________________________________________